Roy Jones Jnr

First topic message reminder :

The most skilled and best boxer who ever lived.

Who comes close to the outrageously talented boxer to lace them up?

by rapidringsroad Today at 5:49 am

While Roy Jones was a very good
boxer he doesn't come anywhere
near being as good as SRR

and with 200 fights he fought the best at
their peaks.
--------------

I suspect you are serious. About that last sentence.

He moved from 160lb in the mid 1990s up to 193lb in 2003. I don’t think its all that outrageous. At light heavyweight he cut weight to make the limit so jumping up to 193 pounds I don’t think was defying physics.

Not really my point anyway, which was that the time he did fail a test I don’t think he realised what he was taking was against the rules. Only 1 out of the 4 governing bodies had the substance on their banned list, it had only recently been added, it was consistent with the kind of product that was legally available in shops. How was it he only failed the test by the IBF for a substance that was only banned by the IBF?

Add to that, the testing process in boxing was and still is piddling. The procedure is archaic and the boxer knows exactly when and where he will be tested. For a top class athlete with financial resources at their disposal to fail a test if they were genuinely doping would be beyond sloppy.

Add to that, the testing process in boxing was and
still is piddling. The procedure is archaic and the
boxer knows exactly when and where he will be
tested. For a top class athlete with financial
resources at their disposal to fail a test if they were
genuinely doping would be beyond sloppy.
-------

For all that, boxing is the major sport with the highest percentages of caught dopers. Not the brightest bunch, hey?

Without wishing to sound like a 'Jones fanboy', as Manos has alluded to Jones was regularly boiling down from about 180 lb (his walk around weight in 1993 / 1994) to make Middleweight when he first hit the title scene. Obviously for his Heavyweight fight he wasn't having to cut any weight beforehand, so a 180 lb walk around weight in 1993 to 193 lb a decade later isn't beyond the realms of possibility.

I can't remember the name of the strength and conditioning coach he hired for the Ruiz bout, but it was the same fella who helped Michael Spinks bulk up to fight Larry Holmes and I'm pretty sure he had a good, solid reputation amongst his peers.

It was really only for the Ruiz fight that Jones had to pack on additional weight per se, as throughout his Light-Heavyweight reign he still only walked around at about thirteen stone and I don't think he was ever above 179 or 180 lb on fight night. He wasn't exactly big at the weight.

manos de piedra wrote:He moved from 160lb in the mid 1990s up to 193lb in 2003. I don’t think its all that outrageous. At light heavyweight he cut weight to make the limit so jumping up to 193 pounds I don’t think was defying physics.

Not really my point anyway, which was that the time he did fail a test I don’t think he realised what he was taking was against the rules. Only 1 out of the 4 governing bodies had the substance on their banned list, it had only recently been added, it was consistent with the kind of product that was legally available in shops. How was it he only failed the test by the IBF for a substance that was only banned by the IBF?

Add to that, the testing process in boxing was and still is piddling. The procedure is archaic and the boxer knows exactly when and where he will be tested. For a top class athlete with financial resources at their disposal to fail a test if they were genuinely doping would be beyond sloppy.

We don't know what the substance was. The Jones team suggested what it was but that wasn't verified by the commission or the IBF.

88Chris05 wrote:Without wishing to sound like a 'Jones fanboy', as Manos has alluded to Jones was regularly boiling down from about 180 lb (his walk around weight in 1993 / 1994) to make Middleweight when he first hit the title scene. Obviously for his Heavyweight fight he wasn't having to cut any weight beforehand, so a 180 lb walk around weight in 1993 to 193 lb a decade later isn't beyond the realms of possibility.

I can't remember the name of the strength and conditioning coach he hired for the Ruiz bout, but it was the same fella who helped Michael Spinks bulk up to fight Larry Holmes and I'm pretty sure he had a good, solid reputation amongst his peers.

It was really only for the Ruiz fight that Jones had to pack on additional weight per se, as throughout his Light-Heavyweight reign he still only walked around at about thirteen stone and I don't think he was ever above 179 or 180 lb on fight night. He wasn't exactly big at the weight.

Mackie Shilstone.

The failed test just leaves suspicion over his career, which is a shame.

Interesting how the US media left it well alone, also.

I agree that the failed test leaves a couple of question marks, Haz, and I've been critical of Jones for being foolish enough to allow those question marks to emerge. It's a shame because Jones had natural talent oozing out of him but he's given his stern critics a reason to doubt him, even though I do think he was "a fool, rather than a knave" as the captain once put it.

The substance has been widely reported and taken as truth as being androstenedione. If you dont want to accept that then fine but I have read numerous sources that report it as being androstenedione.

manos de piedra wrote:The substance has been widely reported and taken as truth as being androstenedione. If you dont want to accept that then fine but I have read numerous sources that report it as being androstenedione.

Do you have one?

BBC and ESPN for example

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2782402

Here is the same link that you posted (in this thread) haz, which reports it as androstenedione.

Roy probably is ONE of the most skilled, naturally talented fighters who ever lived. Others might abide the question (Benny Leonard, Robinson, SRL, Hearns, Mayweather), but Roy's right up there in that regard.

Unlike Mayweather, we have seen Roy showcase absolutely all his skills against the very best on offer at the time (Michalczewski is something of a red herring here - no-one will ever convince me that the German was superior to Toney, Hopkins and the like). Floyd, by contrast, has always left me thinking of a thoroughbred who has never really been given the licence to show what he can really do. Great as Mayweather is and impressive though his record has been, I just feel that he has had it within him to remove any ammunition from the doubters by constructing a series of performances against all opposition that would have made us gasp. For me, he'd have beaten Pacquiao, Paul Williams et al with something to spare, but for whatever reason, he couldn't be bothered to prove it. Pity. No such caveat attaches to Roy.

What does hang over Roy is his shocking decline. I appreciate that he was past his best, that the journey to heavyweight took more out of him than we could have appreciated at the time, but the manner of his slide cannot be completely effaced or passed over. That's why he's top 20 all-time for me, rather than the top 10 inhabitant that he would have undoubtedly been in my book if he'd stopped after Ruiz.

In that respect, RJJ is a bit like Ezzard Charles for me. If Charles had retired before getting smashed by THAT Jersey Joe uppercut, I'd likely rank him the greatest pound for pound fighter ever. He didn't, so he's something like 4 or 5 in my list - you can't absolutely ignore Ezz's next few years, even if you do allow a certain amount of latitude for them.

If I might make the criticism (and I'm going to), the slight snag with one or two of these recent threads that I've read (Robinson, various Floyd ones spring to mind), is that too much has been asserted as an absolute truth. Worse, too much of it has been couched in the sort of aggressive language that brooks no argument or dissent. Very little is ever so clear-cut, in my experience. Encouraging debate is one thing; speaking from this angle, I do find the increasingly yah-boo tone that has crept in to be a bit depressing, not to say a positive disincentive to making any contribution of my own.

Good to see you back Captain. As always hope it is not a flying visit.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Roy probably is ONE of the most skilled, naturally talented fighters who ever lived. Others might abide the question (Benny Leonard, Robinson, SRL, Hearns, Mayweather), but Roy's right up there in that regard.

Unlike Mayweather, we have seen Roy showcase absolutely all his skills against the very best on offer at the time (Michalczewski is something of a red herring here - no-one will ever convince me that the German was superior to Toney, Hopkins and the like). Floyd, by contrast, has always left me thinking of a thoroughbred who has never really been given the licence to show what he can really do. Great as Mayweather is and impressive though his record has been, I just feel that he has had it within him to remove any ammunition from the doubters by constructing a series of performances against all opposition that would have made us gasp. For me, he'd have beaten Pacquiao, Paul Williams et al with something to spare, but for whatever reason, he couldn't be bothered to prove it. Pity. No such caveat attaches to Roy.

What does hang over Roy is his shocking decline. I appreciate that he was past his best, that the journey to heavyweight took more out of him than we could have appreciated at the time, but the manner of his slide cannot be completely effaced or passed over. That's why he's top 20 all-time for me, rather than the top 10 inhabitant that he would have undoubtedly been in my book if he'd stopped after Ruiz.

In that respect, RJJ is a bit like Ezzard Charles for me. If Charles had retired before getting smashed by THAT Jersey Joe uppercut, I'd likely rank him the greatest pound for pound fighter ever. He didn't, so he's something like 4 or 5 in my list - you can't absolutely ignore Ezz's next few years, even if you do allow a certain amount of latitude for them.

If I might make the criticism (and I'm going to), the slight snag with one or two of these recent threads that I've read (Robinson, various Floyd ones spring to mind), is that too much has been asserted as an absolute truth. Worse, too much of it has been couched in the sort of aggressive language that brooks no argument or dissent. Very little is ever so clear-cut, in my experience. Encouraging debate is one thing; speaking from this angle, I do find the increasingly yah-boo tone that has crept in to be a bit depressing, not to say a positive disincentive to making any contribution of my own.

Completely agree

Captain is right about the yaboo stuff and it's entirely my fault.........Getting stroppy in my old age.........

Apologise to Haz and to Chris and anyone else I've been over the top with.....I'll endeavour to reign it in..

Will add that I think many on here don't give the plaudits to Floyd I think his wonderful career deserves and some clutch at straws to find fault...

Jones Jr for me doesn't get enough credit for Hoppo.................I imagine had Curry beat Honeyghan..Honey would have been green also.....

Hoppo hasn't altered his style any..............

As I say anyone I've offended i apologise.

joeyjojo618 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2782402

Here is the same link that you posted (in this thread) haz, which reports it as androstenedione.

That isn't exactly concrete. Boxing News did an excellent expose about 10 years back -- I'll see if I can dig it out.

Good points on Ezzard captain, surely Charles is Jeffs no 1 since Burley is on his résumé ?

As a sidenote, since Charles name has popped up and someone I'm genuinely fascinated in, is he in the top 10 HW of all time in many of the posters lists ? If not he must miss out by a whisker.

Charles is also only behind Ali and Louis with wins over top 10 Heavyweights. His HW Title run is pretty strong and overlooked. Charles is a top 10 HW in my eyes, criminally underrated.

Nick Barone and Breshore were the only filler defenses. Both actually being very tough seasoned guys who had never been knocked out.

Lee Oma=Long time contender coming off his best run. Rings #2 behind Charles going into 1950. Traded wins with Satterfield.
Joe Louis=Returning lineal Champion.
Gus Lesnevich=former LHW Champion and rival he had been trying to get in the ring for years.
Pat Valentino=tough top 10 fighter coming off a win over Ring's 1949 #3 Turkey Thompson.
Joe Walcott=Rematch with long time rival, top Heavyweight.
Joey Maxim=Long time HW contender and current LHW Champion.

Not a shabby reign and seems to be bypassed when great heavyweights discussion is surfacing.

Cheers Rodders

Do you have Charles above Frazier ???

Couldn't, in all conscience, place him as high as 10 as a heavyweight pure and simple, Rodney. As you say, very sound at heavyweight, but not the spellbinding brilliance of his light-heavyweight days. 15 or 16 perhaps? Hard to separate him from Jersey Joe overall; Charles' heroic battles against both Marciano and Father Time add lustre to his heavyweight CV, but one or two losses too many (albeit late in life) at the weight to get ahead of the real head men in the division.

I think the yobo behavior is driven by ego most of the time. The debates become battles of one-upmanship. From my own point of view this is the reason I end up in these scraps, oh and for the Haye diatribes.

A very small number of posters I just don't take seriously and try to wind them up if I feel they deserve it.

Well he's top twenty for sure, Rodney, but I think top ten is going a bit over the top, personally. Not a slight on Ezzard but I have a hard time believing that he'd have been able to live with the likes of Tyson, Frazier and Liston, all of whom occupy spots between, say, eighth and twelfth in my own list. Marciano occupies a similar kind of rank for me, and we know he failed to beat Rocky in two attempts, even if he did come close on both occasions.

Can't see any way he can work his way in to that group, personally.

He beat a long list of highly-ranked fighters, but then again, I wouldn't consider those years all that strong in terms of depth. Obviously, not all eras can match the sixties and seventies, but Maxim, Valentino and Oma wouldn't even stand out as the cream of the crop against the much-derided eighties opposition which Tyson ran through, or maybe even that stop-gap era between the reigns of Dempsey and Louis.

Probably sixteenth or something like that, for me.

With all due respect to Rodney I think we can tell by his posting history that Boxing stopped in the 70s...

I mean that respectfully.......Rowley and Chris are fond of rating fighters from the past favorably....

Rodders does take it to the extreme..It has to be said.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:With all due respect to Rodney I think we can tell by his posting history that Boxing stopped in the 70s...

I mean that respectfully.......Rowley and Chris are fond of rating fighters from the past favorably....

Rodders does take it to the extreme..It has to be said.

Is this what is meant by unnecessary antagonism?

No it's making an assessment based on posting record............and fairplay to him for his opinions.......

Just saying what everybody else is thinking..

Anyone who has Louis over Ali, doesn't rate Mayweather and has Charles in a Top 10 list.....

draw your own conclusions..

Wouldn't say that was antagonising Strongback...

To be fair Rowley has openly admitted on a previous thread that he prefers to say in the past as to not get caught up in the kind of disagreements which have come about the past two days with regards to modern fighters.

That isn't to say he doesn't know his stuff about modern day fighters because I would guess he does, but the majority of his posts do surround fighters of the past...as Truss said not a slight on him because if it wasn't for Rowley, 88chris05, captain and the likes my knowledge on the past, especially pre 1960's ish would be just as poor now as it was when I first joined the board.

Good lad Owen...good to see someone with spunk on here...

Credit to your Country!!

rapidringsroad wrote: While Roy Jones was a very good boxer he doesn't come anywhere near being as good as SRR. To me Jones' fights were quite often boring and lacked excitement.I'm not saying that Robinson didn't have the odd stinker I'm sure he did but he didn't deteriate as drasticly as Jones and with 200 fights he fought the best at their peaks. Must rate as best ever for me.

In fairness, I don't think anyone is arguing that Jones is a 'greater' fighter than Robinson, as it's obviously a results and records-based business, and Robinson's ensure that he'll always be ahead of Jones in the all-time pecking order. I also don't think that anyone can deny that, if you combine other factors such as chin, ring marts and the ability to curb their style once those physical skills start to wane, then both of the Sugar Rays as well as a couple of others surpass Roy in terms of being the complete package in all senses.

I think Az is just trying to emphasis Roy's pure physical gifts, which I do think potentially could have been greater than anyone else's.

Michael Nunn is a good example, too. From an athletic point of view, the guy had so much talent it was almost scary and he had fantastic physical gifts; far more than someone like Hopkins, for instance. But Hopkins will forever outrank Nunn because, eventually, no matter how good you are there will come a time when you need more than just athleticism, and Nunn was just too egotistical to accept that. If he'd have been able to match his supreme talent with a better boxing brain and if he hadn't have believed his own hype so much, he could have potentially been the greatest Middleweight ever for all we know.

Nunn was beating Toney it has to be said.....Toney needed a knockout to win..

Nunn's confidence like Hamed's was shot after that freak ko.........He was a confidence fighter...

Being harsh Chris I think.........

I think Meldrick Taylor was as physically gifted as anyone who ever boxed. Gym wars and Chavez took their toll, though.

Think Taylor was completely ripped off....looking at Steele's performance in Hearns-Barkley 1..........

True, but my point is that Nunn left the door open for Toney to land that enormous left hook by admiring his work a bit too much as the fight wore on. As much as I love Fat Toney, he didn't like facing mobile fighters and when Nunn was on the move he had Toney tied up in knots. As the fight wore on, though, he started fighting Toney's kind of fight and, even if you think he was still nicking rounds from six onwards, he was getting hit a lot more in them than he had been earlier on. I think Nunn's ego got the better of him and he tried to outmuscle and outfight Toney which, as I'm sure he'd admit now, was a bad idea when he had the skills to box his way to a decision without getting involved too much.

Fantastic talent but I do feel he was lacking a bit between the ears.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Think Taylor was completely ripped off....looking at Steele's performance in Hearns-Barkley 1..........

It was a highly controversial stoppage. Even had Taylor been permitted to win, though, the damage had been done. He was never the same after the battering he absorbed (despite boxing JCC's head off for long spells). Taylor was fantastic to watch.

Ali left himself open to be decked by Frazier in the 15th Chris....Johnson-Willard....

Leonard-Kevin Howard..

When you're tired you make mistakes...I see where you're coming from but...Nunn got punished for a mistake other fighters get away with it...

Luck.perhaps??.or maybe you're right..

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Think Taylor was completely ripped off....looking at Steele's performance in Hearns-Barkley 1..........

It was a highly controversial stoppage. Even had Taylor been permitted to win, though, the damage had been done. He was never the same after the battering he absorbed (despite boxing JCC's head off for long spells). Taylor was fantastic to watch.

Agreed........ but for me Steele had a shocking favoritism for King fighters..........

Tyson-Ruddock
Tyson-Bruno
Chavez - Taylor...........Shocking displays............

I imagine If he was refereeing in Tokyo Douglas would never have been champ..

i often think that Calzaghe prospered in spite of Enzo rather than because of him, which takes some natural talent!!

The odd thing about Taylor is that people often say the Chavez fight finished him, but ignore that he still had some success and decent performances afterwards, even if his edge had been blunted a bit.

The decline he hit after Chavez was nothing in comparison to the one he hit after being given that tanning by Norris (as I've said before, Meldrick kind of deserves it for those dreadful shorts alone, mind you!). Espana completely chased him out of town in his very next fight.

I think Taylor had phenomenal attacking gifts, but his defense was pretty so-so and, as the Chavez fight showed, he was no great tactician.

Speed was the key..........Had the record for most punches thrown in a round........

Remember watching the Meekins fight...(he was quality) hands like a blur!!

Mcgirt couldn't cope..........As for Norris what kind of idiot made that fight!!

A dreadful bit of matchmaking, that's for sure. Always found it a little bit amusing how Duva bemoaned how cynical King was by making the pointless Chavez-Taylor rematch once he had Meldrick under his wing having plucked him from Main Events, and how King was showing a lack of concern for Taylor's health and career prospects, while conveniently ignoring that his idea of putting Taylor in there with Norris was nigh-on suicidal.

Norris was a huge Light-Middleweight who could whack big time with both fists, had speed to burn himself and was sky-high in confidence at that stage. Not one of Duva's best!

It was made at 150 catchweight...........However who knows what Norris weighed on the night.

I know, but as you said Norris (as expected) was dwarfing Taylor come fight night. Besides, even at 150 Taylor was going to be a shade vulnerable, as he was already going some just to be a decent Welter, given his small frame. He wasn't even that big at 140, and word around the camp fire has often been that Main Events were only compelled to keep him in that weight class so he and Whitaker could both clear a path to world titles in separate divisions. Taylor could probably have been a Lightweight had he wished to be one, at least for the first few years of his career.

Superb performance against McGirt to win his first title though, as you said. Buddy was looking well placed for a couple of rounds, but then Taylor just hit the groove and never let up. Such a free-flowing fighter and style. I don't recall the referee having to break them once.